Cyprus

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: I would like to inform the House of developments in relation to Cyprus.
	Following the breakdown of settlement negotiations in The Hague in March 2003, the UN Secretary-General made a report to the Security Council. In this report Kofi Annan announced that his proposal for a comprehensive Cyprus settlement (the Annan plan) remained on the table. However, he added that he did not propose to take any further initiatives unless and until he was given solid reason to believe that the necessary political will existed for a successful outcome.
	The Secretary-General went on to say that he believed it would be a great step backward if the plan were simply to wither away. He believed that a solution on the basis of the plan could be achieved only if there was an unequivocally stated preparedness on the part of the leaders of both sides, fully and determinedly backed at the highest level in both motherlands, to commit themselves: (a) to finalise the plan (without reopening its basic principles or essential trade-offs) by a specific date with United Nations assistance; and (b) to put it to separate simultaneous referendums as provided for in the plan on a date certain soon thereafter.
	The United Kingdom shared this approach and continued to work with its EU and US partners in support of UN efforts to keep the plan on the table and to encourage the parties to demonstrate the necessary political will to re-engage.
	The elections in north Cyprus on 14 December 2003 marked a turning point. The Turkish Cypriots voiced their resounding support for the pro-settlement, pro-EU parties and in doing so gave popular expression to a growing desire from the Turkish Cypriot community to work for an early settlement of the Cyprus problem in order to allow a reunited Cyprus to join the EU on 1 May 2004. Encouraged by the attitude of the Turkish Cypriots and aware of the potential positive impact a Cyprus settlement would have on its own EU aspirations, the AKP government in Ankara led by Prime Minister Erdogan signalled its own willingness to re-engage and work constructively for a settlement.
	The parties (the Greek and Turkish Cypriots, Greece and Turkey) were therefore invited to New York by the Secretary-General on 4 February 2004 in order to resume negotiations towards a settlement on the basis of the Annan plan. On 13 February, following an initial round of discussions, the Secretary-General announced that the parties had agreed to resume talks on the basis of the Annan plan and had committed themselves to a three-phase process leading to a finalised plan being submitted to simultaneous, separate referendums on 24 April.
	The 13 February agreement was a landmark achievement. The parties had committed themselves to a strict timetable and a negotiation process which led inexorably towards simultaneous referendums on a pre-determined date on the basis of a settlement plan which, absent agreement between the parties (including, in the final stage, Greece and Turkey) would be finalised by the Secretary-General himself.
	Negotiations between the two sides resumed in Cyprus on 19 February. In parallel to the main political level negotiations between the leaders of the two communities, technical committees started to work through the whole range of laws and administrative texts and practical arrangements necessary to give effect to the new state of affairs.
	During this phase of the negotiations, our High Commissioner in Nicosia informed the UN that the UK's earlier offer to the UN of giving up roughly half of the territory of the Sovereign Base areas in Cyprus remained valid, subject to some small changes in the map. The land to be ceded to the United Cyprus Republic would not in any way compromise the operational capabilities of the bases themselves. The UN confirmed that the UK's offer would be very valuable in taking forward the adjustments to the territory of the two new constituent states. The UK's offer has been incorporated in the UN's map for the new Cyprus.
	On 24 March, the negotiations moved to Buergenstock, Switzerland, where the UN and the parties were joined by Greece and Turkey in a final push for a negotiated settlement agreed between the parties themselves. The UK attended in its capacity as a guarantor power in order to assist the efforts of the UN Secretary-General's good offices mission. The European Commissioner for Enlargement, Gunter Verheugen, also attended for the final days.
	On 29 March the Secretary-General presented the parties with a revised plan. This revision was produced following extensive consultation and aimed to strike a balanced compromise, building on the earlier version of the Annan plan which had been presented to the parties in February 2003, and taking subsequent developments and both sides' views carefully into account. Following a further final round of meetings between the Secretary-General, the parties and Greece and Turkey, Kofi Annan called the parties together late on 31 March. Announcing that the time for negotiation and consultation was over, and that the time for decision and action had arrived, the Secretary-General presented the parties and the guarantor powers (Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom) with his finalised plan—Annan IV—for a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem.
	In his remarks, Kofi Annan said that the plan was inevitably a compromise. It did not satisfy everyone's demands. But he believed that it met the core interests, and addressed the key concerns, of people on both sides. He added that the choice was not between the plan and some other mythical solution. In reality, the choice was between the settlement on offer or no settlement at all. The Government share this view.
	No one is under any illusion about what remains to be done. No one is saying that reunification will be easy. But the plan is balanced and fair, and offers all Cypriots the chance of a better future as citizens of a United Cyprus Republic within the European Union. The Government believe strongly that this is a chance which must not be squandered.
	The final decision will now be taken by the Cypriots themselves in separate, simultaneous referendums to be held on 24 April.

Deepcut: Surrey Police Final Report

Lord Bach: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Defence (Mr Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On 4 March 2004 the Chief Constable of Surrey Police published his final report following the completion of the investigation into the deaths of Privates Sean Benton, Cheryl James, Geoff Gray and James Collinson at Princess Royal Barracks, Deepcut between 1995 and 2002. At the Chief Constable's request I placed copies of the report in the Libraries of both Houses on the same day.
	In conducting background research for their report Surrey Police drew considerably on information provided by the Army. I recognise the interest of right honourable and honourable Members in these cases and am today arranging for a number of documents mentioned specifically in the report to be placed in the Library of the House shortly.
	These documents have, where appropriate, been expurgated to remove security-sensitive material and references to third parties.
	We continue to give the Chief Constable's recommendations careful consideration. I expect to make a further announcement after the Easter Recess.

Chemical Protection Programme

Lord Bach: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Defence (Mr Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The UK's chemical protection programme is designed to protect against the use of chemical weapons. Such a programme is permitted by the Chemical Weapons Convention, with which the United Kingdom is fully compliant. Under the terms of the convention, we are required to provide information annually to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). In accordance with the Government's commitment to openness, I am placing in the House of Commons Library a copy of the summary that has been provided to the organisation outlining the UK's chemical protection programme for 2004.

Afghanistan: Expansion of ISAF

Lord Bach: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Defence (Mr Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Since the inception of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in December 2001, the United Kingdom has been a key contributor. We have maintained a continuous presence in Kabul where our troops have once again established a high reputation. That useful work has been complemented by our provincial reconstruction team (PRT) in Mazar-e-Sharif, currently operating under the command of the coalition across the five provinces of Balkh, Faryab, Jowzjan, Samangan and Sar-e-Pol. No one should doubt the United Kingdom's commitment to Afghanistan.
	United Nations Security Council Resolution 1510 authorised ISAF to expand beyond Kabul and offered the opportunity to start to bring the ISAF and the PRTs together. Since December 2003, NATO has operated its own PRT in the north-eastern city of Konduz as part of ISAF. Building on that experience, and that of coalition PRTs, NATO's detailed operational planning to expand the ISAF across Afghanistan is nearing completion. In view of the parliamentary Recess I believe the House would wish to be informed of developments which are likely to occur shortly.
	Within this planning, and in conjunction with our international partners, we have offered to NATO to lead the expansion process in the north of the country, where we already have a significant presence through our own PRT. As part of our expanded commitment, and once NATO has agreed its operational plan, we shall lead a second multinational PRT that we intend to establish in the northern city of Meymaneh. Again, in co-operation with our international partners, we shall establish and maintain facilities to support PRTs across the north of Afghanistan. Finally, we plan to transfer command of the PRT in Mazar-e-Sharif from the coalition to the ISAF.
	This will require some increase in the number of British troops routinely deployed in Afghanistan, although until negotiations with our international partners are complete, I am not in a position to indicate what the precise total will be but I will keep the House informed as this develops. I can confirm, however, that this commitment, which will utilise forces allocated to but not deployed forward in Afghanistan and some other enabling elements in the initial stages, is sustainable.
	The expansion of the ISAF will be a major challenge. The United Kingdom, in line with our determination to help the Afghan people to rebuild their country, is resolved to play its full part in meeting that challenge. By leading expansion in the north we shall do so in a sustainable and effective manner to the long-term benefit of Afghanistan and her people.

Clinical Trials Directive

Lord Warner: We are today laying before Parliament the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004, which will implement into United Kingdom law Directive 2001/20 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the member states relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use. The regulations will come into force on 1 May 2004, the date by which member states are required to implement the directive.
	These regulations will ensure that the rights, safety and well-being of clinical trial subjects are protected by requiring sponsors of trials to be responsible for designing, conducting, recording and reporting clinical trials according to principles of good clinical practice derived from the principles set out in the amended 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. In addition, the regulations will further protect public health by ensuring that the results of clinical trials are collected, recorded and analysed in accordance with internationally recognised principles so that they can be audited and verified before being used to impact on public health, for example through a publication that changes medical prescribing practice or as evidence to support applications to place medicines on the market.
	The regulations will provide a statutory basis for:
	standardisation of procedures for ethical and competent authority consideration and authorisation;
	good clinical practice (GCP) standards for commencing and conducting clinical trials;
	good manufacturing practice (GMP) standards for medicines used in clinical trials; and
	inspections against internationally accepted principles and standards of GCP and GMP, supported by enforcement powers.
	The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the Department of Health will be publishing guidance on the new procedures which the regulations will implement from 1 May 2004. This will cover applications for clinical trial authorisations, inspections, ethics committee applications, informed consent for incapacitated adults and sponsorship of clinical trials.
	The Government have undertaken extensive consultation with stakeholders in both the pharmaceutical industry and the non-commercial clinical trials sector on how to implement the directive. Where possible, concerns expressed by the non-commercial sector, in particular, about the possible regulatory burden, have been taken into account in the UK regulations. Furthermore, the MHRA and Department of Health have been working with stakeholders to help them to comply with the practical requirements of the regulations. The Government believe that the regulations achieve a proper balance by safeguarding the rights of patients involved in clinical trials while avoiding a disproportionate impact on those who carry out clinical trials.

Her Majesty's Land Registry: Key Performance Indicators and Targets 2004–05

Lord Filkin: My noble and learned friend the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor has today set the following key performance targets for Her Majesty's Land Registry for 2004–05.
	
		
			 KPI Target 2003–04 KPI Achievement(At 6/2/04) 2004–05 
			 Customer Service—Speed 
			 Percentage of office copy and official search applications processed within two working days. 98% 100% 98% 
			 Percentage of all registrations processed within 20 working days. 80% 88% 80% 
			 Accuracy  
			 Percentage of registrations processed free of any error. 98.5% 98.8% 98.5% 
			 Overall Satisfaction
			 Percentage of customers who, overall, are very satisfied/satisfied with the full range of services provided by Land Registry. Better than94 98.7% Better than95 
			 Financial  
			 Percentage return on average capital employed. 6% 6% 3.5% 
			 Efficiency  
			 Cost per unit in:  
			 cash terms £29.08 £27.23 £28.98 
			 (real terms) (£22.17) (£20.55) (£21.43) 
		
	
	Critical Action Points
	
		
			 2003–04 Outcome at 6/2/2004 
			 Start pilot implementation for e-discharges. Achieved. 
			 Make all key Land Registry information services available over the Internet. Title Plans not yet available online. 
			 Implement the Land Registration Act 2002. Achieved. 
			 Report to Ministers on proposals for e-conveyancing service and procurement strategy. Submission forwarded on 27 February 2004. 
		
	
	
		
			 2004–05  
			 Customer Service: Enable printing of authenticated results of official searches and copies in a customer's office.  
			 Land Registration: Carry out consultation on a standard form of lease.  
			 Electronic Service Delivery: Start the pilot for processing e-lodgement of forms.  
			 Make Land Registry data available to the EULIS demonstrator.

Tobacco: EU Enlargement

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My honourable friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Mr John Healey) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today laying regulations confirming the introduction of quantitative restrictions on travellers bringing tobacco products from those new EU member states taking advantage of a derogation allowing them to delay meeting minimum duty levels on certain tobacco products.
	The restrictions will apply from 1 May to the following:
	cigarettes bought duty-paid in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia;
	manufactured tobacco products 1 bought duty-paid in the Czech Republic; and
	smoking tobacco 2 bought duty-paid in Estonia.
	Where new member states take advantage of the derogation, existing member states are entitled to maintain the same restrictions on the import of cigarettes and some other tobacco products bought in those countries for a traveller's own use as are currently applied to travellers arriving from third countries, including the new member states.
	The Excise Duty Points (Etc.)(New Member States) Regulations 2004, the Customs and Excise Duties (Travellers' Allowances and Personal Reliefs) Order 2004 and the Channel Tunnel (Alcoholic Liquor and Tobacco Products)(Amendment) Order 2004 allow the UK to maintain these restrictions.
	After Accession on 1 May, travellers to the UK bringing in tobacco products from the countries covered by the regulations will be restricted, as they are currently, to a limit of 200 cigarettes, or, in the case of Estonia, to a limit of 200 cigarettes or 250 grams of smoking tobacco; or, in the case of the Czech Republic, to a limit of 200 cigarettes or 50 cigars or 100 cigarillos or 250 grams of smoking tobacco.
	While the EU minimum duty rates are not met, uncertainties over the impact of EU enlargement on excise smuggling and cross-border shopping are also heightened.
	The Government will therefore review both the operational and principled justification for retention of quantitive restrictions after 12 months in light of developments in smuggling and shopping patterns, and in light of progress made by the new member states to comply with the minimum duty levels.
	Customs and Excise has plans in place to explain the restrictions to the travel industry and general public.
	1 Manufactured tobacco products includes cigars, cigarillos and smoking tobacco.
	2 Smoking tobacco is hand rolling tobacco (HRT) and pipe tobacco.